Government sets terms of reference for vetting and barring review

The government has set out the terms for its review of the controversial Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS) as well as for an overhaul of the criminal records regime.

Under terms of reference laid down in Parliament last week, the review will look at the fundamental principles and objectives behind the VBS regime.

It will:

• Evaluate the scope of the scheme's coverage
• Examine the appropriate function, role and structures of relevant safeguarding bodies and appropriate governance arrangements, and
• Recommend what, if any, scheme is needed now, “taking into account how to raise awareness and understanding of risk and responsibility for safeguarding in society more generally”.

Sunita Mason, the government’s independent advisor for criminality information management, will meanwhile lead the review on criminal records.

She is to consider whether the disclosure of minor offences and police intelligence to prospective employers within the criminal records check should still form part of the process.

Home Office Minister Lynne Featherstone said the original vetting and barring scheme was not a proportionate response.

She said: “There should be a presumption that people wishing to work or volunteer with children and vulnerable adults are safe to do so unless it can be shown otherwise.

Featherstone added that the criminal records regime had developed piecemeal for years, and needed a revamp to strike a balance between protecting civil liberties and protecting the public.

Children and Families Minister Tim Loughton argued that the original VBS plans threatened to drive a wedge between children and well-meaning adults.

“Such individuals should be welcomed and encouraged as much as possible, unless it can be shown that children would not be safe in their care.”

The final recommendations in relation to the VBS are due to be published early in 2011.

Home Secretary Theresa May suspended the vetting and barring scheme in June, claiming that the original plans were draconian. She said she wanted to reduce the scope of the scheme to “common sense” levels.